The cycling world records seem to get broken every time the british riders set wheel on the track.

It's a bit like long track speed skating at the Winter Olympics where many variables come into play, track conditions, equipment advances, etc. So comparing records is a bit of a fool's game in these sports.

Bradley Wiggins just won the Tour De France (a race where recent winners have been caught or been accused of doping), yet nobody in the UK is casting aspersions on his achievement. Our velodrome cyclists are dominating and smashing world records, and the French are accusing them of being dopers. It's possible, but until there's even some decent circumstancial evidence, it's sour grapes. Doping is rife in cycling, yet UK is the current dominant force in cycling...yet there's no way the UK press or public would ever suggest Chris Hoy, Victorian Pendleton, Mark Cavendish and Bradley Wiggins were drug cheats.

You have obviously never been on the Cycling news forum.
According to them, every cyclist to ever win anything must be doping, the whole of BC is run on a either undetectable PED or a backhander to the UCI who ignore any evidence of doping.

You have obviously never been on the Cycling news forum.
According to them, every cyclist to ever win anything must be doping, the whole of BC is run on a either undetectable PED or a backhander to the UCI who ignore any evidence of doping.

The cycling news forum is hardly going to be seen by anyone but hardcore cycling junkies.

What I'm talking about the the general public and the media. There is never even the slightest whiff of suspicion or questioning that our cyclists are performing ridiculously well, in a sport rife with doping. If a British rider hadn't won the Tour this year, I'm sure there would be a few snide comments in the UK media about the winner being like Lance Armstrong or Alberto Contador (ie, dopers).

If another country were performing like us at cycling, there'd be insinuations in our media that there was widespread doping.

The cycling news forum is hardly going to be seen by anyone but hardcore cycling junkies.

What I'm talking about the the general public and the media. There is never even the slightest whiff of suspicion or questioning that our cyclists are performing ridiculously well, in a sport rife with doping. If a British rider hadn't won the Tour this year, I'm sure there would be a few snide comments in the UK media about the winner being like Lance Armstrong or Alberto Contador (ie, dopers).

If another country were performing like us at cycling, there'd be insinuations in our media that there was widespread doping.

Maybe the BC and Sky team are systematically doping, but there is not a shred of evidence for it, be it circumstantial or something more definitive. Nothing whatsoever. Therefore it's absurd to suggest an East German style programme could have been covered up to this degree for at least 6 years. It's not myopic Brits, it's good old common sense.

Maybe the BC and Sky team are systematically doping, but there is not a shred of evidence for it, be it circumstantial or something more definitive. Nothing whatsoever. Therefore it's absurd to suggest an East German style programme could have been covered up to this degree for at least 6 years. It's not myopic Brits, it's good old common sense.

The US track and field team of 20+ years ago? A veritable stink.

Now you are just coming across as nationalistic/patriotic. Before you claimed about athletics that "any record from the 80's and 90's is suspect".

Now it's only the East Germans and US track team (you should throw in the Chinese as well)? Make up your mind. Either the whole sport was dirty and suspect in that period, or just the countries you deem to be.

Linford Christie would never be held under suspicion for doping in this country, if he hadn't failed a test just as he was in the retirement phase of his career. He'd have been held up as the only "clean athlete" from his era, mainly because he's a Brit. And Brits are never cheaters, unless they get caught

It's not absurd at all. It took years before people started finding out that the US athletics federation covered up failed tests for it's athletes like Lewis. The cover-up was succesful for a very long time. There is absolutely no reason why a systematic cover-up for british cycling couldn't be succesfully in place, and it might be years before the truth comes out. It always happens like that.

Just like Andre Agassi was only found out to have failed a drugs test because he admitted it in his autobiography, 20 years after the fact. His tennis federation covered it up for him. That's how these things work.

Same nonsense happened in Baseball for years as well. cover-ups and denials.

Cycling is a highly dirty sport. This is the dirtiest era of the sport. Therefore any success achieved by anyone (no matter their nationality) has to be suspect. So the British team is as suspect as anyone else, simply because the sport they are in is so reliant on doping. Maybe not fair, but there it is. Anything else is just being hypocritical. Hoy, Wiggins and company are just as likely to be dopers as some spanish cyclist or Armstrong.